Can climate models capture the high amplitudes circumglobal waves and their surface imprints?

Pronounced circumglobal waves can trigger and maintain persistent summer weather conditions by remaining in their preferred phase-locked positions for several weeks in a row. This phenomenon, especially important for wave numbers 5 and 7, has been observed in recent years, but it is unclear whether climate models can reproduce circulation types and their surface imprints.

Here we assess three climate models (EC-Earth3, CESM1.2, and MIROC5)  for their representation of amplified circumglobal waves and associated surface imprints in summer (June, July and August) over 1979-2016. ERA5 reanalysis data is used as reference to assess the models’ performance. We run a series of modeling experiments to understand the source of biases in the climate models: free interactive atmosphere and soil moisture runs (AISI), atmospheric nudged runs (AFSI), soil moisture prescribed runs (AISF), and both atmosphere and soil moisture nudged experiments (AFSF).

We show that all models reasonably well reproduce the climatological wave spectra. Further, both wave 5 and wave 7 are found to exhibit phase-locking behaviors across all models, resulting in similar wave patterns across the hemisphere as compared to reanalysis. The surface imprints are observed in the models as well, but depending on the model, the results vary in strength. We also found the biases in surface temperature and precipitation anomalies mainly come from the atmospheric circulation in the models as these biases reduced considerably from AISI runs to AFSI and AFSF runs where upper atmosphere levels were nudged. Nudging soil moisture also minimizes some biases in the models but not as obvious as nudging the atmosphere.